Slashdot Mirror

You're close - in the States, we actually generate power off of the Taco Bell grease traps...

Oil from Algae has great potential. Contrary to what one poster said, there are strains of algae that produce a very large amount of oil. Up to 70% of the dry weight, but more likely around 40%. My favorite algae is Botryococcus braunii because it creates Alkanes, which can be used directly as fuel or transformed into the chemical equivalent of the petroleum fuels we know and love - i.e. Octane, Kerosene, etc. This happens without the inefficiency inherent in the production of biodiesel.

It is true that the carbon so sequestered is again released into the atmosphere. This is unfortunate, but not as much of a problem as it seems at first glance. While the 'low hanging fruit' in terms of surplus CO2 is such industrial processes as fermenting of wine and coal-fired power plants, the secondary source of CO2 can be from everyday air - or air that's not as good as everyday, such as that in polluted cities. There is also the potential of creating an algae bioreactor inside an automobile's exhaust system. That's pretty far off in the future with what we've got right now, but possible.

The current state of the industry in algal fuel oil production is one of confusion. There are snake-oil salesmen (no pun intended) making wild claims about their proprietary, secret systems which are incredible (in the bad meaning of the word). These do not stand up to scientific scrutiny but seem to make headlines and sucker in some angel capital (or at least try to). Not all startups are frauds, however. There is some good progress being made by companies like Greenfuels Technologies. But there is a spectre haunting the market: the ghost of the coal-sands projects of the 1970s which spent billions of dollars without producing tangible returns. These were canceled during the Reagan era when gasoline became cheap again. People seem to have short memories. What would happen a company which produces these expensive fuels if the bottom drops out of the petroleum market? They'd quickly go bust. This is because there is not yet enough government incentives making it possible to compete with temporarily cheap petroleum. What is needed is thoughtful, large scale action by major governments around the world to develop the best alternative energy systems, be they wind, biofuels, even nuclear. For instance, the first thing needed is a moratorium on transportation fuel taxes, guaranteed for a period of time - say ten years. This means not only the removal of federal taxes on these fuels, but the prohibition of state and local taxes on them. Next, there needs to be encouragement for distribution of alternative fuels, such as local licensing boards requiring a certain proportion of fuel pumps to be alternative. There needs to be pressure put on the operators of large fleets of vehicles to utilize the fuels and vehicles for them, and incentives to make their refueling depots available for use by the public.

I could go into some of the technical details regarding the ideas I have on how to make various fuels in an economically viable manner. However, Slashdot isn't the place to go on at (even further) length. If you're interested in this type of stuff, there are several forums, such as Bio-Diesel Now, which I post on and encourage others to get involved with as well. Even so, as much as I'd like my ideas to be adopted, I'd also like some money for my inventions, so I am holding some thoughts back until I meet the right people to work with.

It's a shame that GreenFuels Technologies is right in the middle of the type of things I'd like to do in the algal fuels industry, and their offices are in the same city as me, but they seem to have no use for a computer techie as myself who would like to try his hand at a new industry (my inquiries about jo

Trading code for payment in kind or even the joy of having the code being used is about as laissez-faire as you can get! Biofuels: Jouney to forever has good basic understandable howtos and BioDieselNow has forums for colaboration with other enthusiates, people are actually establishing their own manufacturing co-ops that are also selling commercialy to the public in biodiesel. those plus the usual sites like wikipedia and google should be more than enough to get you started.

Biodiesel that has been properly produced (that means drying it after washing it) does NOT contain water.

It IS hygroscopic (attracts water), but an additive will take care of that - and, so is regular petroleum diesel, for that matter. Using it quickly, or not letting it sit in a container that air can get in, solves that problem, as well.

BTW, fuel tanks on most diesel cars are plastic. Even on my Jetta, which is a 1985, I have a plastic tank.

Check the following sites:

http://www.biodieselnow.com/
http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/
http://forums.tdiclub.com/forumdisplay.php?f=52 (centric to modern VW diesels)

For tutorials try journey to forever to get started. They are geared toward helping indiginous people produce fuels and energy so it not high-tech to an unreachable point for real human beings and do-able in your garage to suppliment your fuel for lawn mowers and string trimmers, and yes gas engines in them can run on 10% biodiesel gasoline mixtures. I'm looking into making a b10-e10 mixture!
This site has forums, biodieselnow with lots of interesting questions and answers about biodeisel; everything for garage setups to large scale commercial production.

This has been under discussion here since 2004.

You can find mind-numbing levels of information and speculation about CWT's Missouri plant at BioDieselNow.

There's been two clear problems with the plan so far as I can see: Firstly, their business model assumed that the use of animal waste as feedstock was not long-term feasible (concerns over Mad Cow disease). If animal remnants stopped being used as feedstock, there would be no competing market for them, and therefore their price would drop, or they might even be paid for taking away the waste and destroying it. That didn't happen.

Secondly, the plant did generate odor complaints from the area residents, enough to require remediation. I'm sure that's long-term fixable, it just wasn't fully anticipated.

The other thing people should keep in mind is that as the need for petroleum alternatives grows, the impetus for solving existing problems will grow. Rather than depending on inefficient sources like Soy, future needs will probably be met by alternatives like algae (covered on /. here).

Yeah, not exactly experimental. I have over 50,000 miles on a 2002 Volkswagen New Beetle TDI, and over 5000 miles on a Jeep Liberty CRD burning biodiesel. In the summer I use 100% (B100) biodiesel, in the winter depending on how cold it is I use 50% (B50) to 20% (B20) biodiesel.

I know people with over 100,000 miles of biodiesel use.

All with no modifications to their stock diesel engines.

Our local city and state government use biodiesel in all their fleets.

Here is a list of some local businesses that use Biodiesel and contribute to the production of biodiesel in our area.

Here is a good site that has links, and a good group of forums on real world biodiesel use.

Another point of fact:

According to Dr. Michael Briggs, who headed the UNH Biodiesel Program, about 85% of the cost of biodiesel is the feedstock (soybeans, canola, etc.). Briggs is a frequent poster at:

http://www.biodieselnow.com/

Until we get the cost of the feedstock down low, biodiesel will only be competetive with petrodiesel with the help of subsidies. Algae has the potential to do this, as has been noted elsewhere.

It has much cleaner emissions, it keeps your fuel system cleaner, and it supports local economies! It requirs no changes to diesel-powered vehicles made after 1995 (generally). My VW Golf TDI gets 45mpg! It's starting to get big in Portland, OR.

http://www.gobiodiesel.org/
http://www.biodiesel.org/
http://www.biodieselnow.com/
http://www.sqbiofuels.com/

Although I think Bio-Diesel is our best chance to make it through peak oil intact, there appears to be a number of issues with Bio-Diesel from algae, both from the economic stand point and from the supposed CO2 reduction benifits (when being feed by coal plants).
1) When using CO2 from coal plants this does NOT directly reduce the CO2 released into the atmosphere, since the CO2 from coal will be re-released when the Bio-Diesel is burned. But you will get twice the "Mileage" from the same amount of CO2, since it will provide you with electricity first, and then power your car. When Bio-Diesel is derived from plant sources it is much better, since the CO2 came from the air to begin with rather then coal.
2) There is good reason to suspect that algae produced Bio-Diesel highly will never be economical. A very good article pointing out some of the problems with algae derived Bio-diesel was re-posted to biodieselnow, which sums up these conserns:

• Ted Trainer writes to the EnergyResources mailing list: Here is a summary of how biodiesel from algae situation seems to me to be in view of the evidence I have come across. Please let me have any new information.

  In ideal conditions some species of algae grow at very high rates, up to 30 times the rate for land plants. Sheehan (1998) claims 50g/m/d, (which equates to 180t/ha/y although he does not say this growth rate can be kept up for a year.) Reference is made to a proposed scheme intended to harvest 67t/ha/y, more or less equivalent to sugar cane. The oil content can be 40%. Of special interest for energy production is the possibility of using sea water in large shallow desert ponds. 200,000 ha are claimed to be capable of producing 1 Quad, or 8.4 EJ of biodiesel. Presumably this is a gross output. The claim is puzzling; if a 50 t/ha yield is assumed and algae have the same energy content as wood, then the gross production would only be 160 - 200PJ, only 2% of the claimed amount. In any case that output corresponds to a photosynthesis rate of 7% p.a. When it is growing fast corn achieves c5%, but averages only .3% over a year. (Pimentel, 2004). Sorensen (2000, p 3.11) says algae on reefs average 2%, but this could be raised to 3.7%.

  Sheehan points out that yields are more like 10g/m/d in field conditions, as distinct from the lab. A major problem is that constant high temperatures facilitate high yields, but large scale energy production would involve large open ponds in deserts, where temperatures fall at night. Siting ponds close to power plants would enable use of warm cooling water.

  Cost estimates reported vary considerably, but the equivalent of oil at $(US)65-100 is quoted. Sheehan does not give energy costs of production.

  One difficulty is that the conditions which increase growth rates reduce oil content. Starving the algae of nutrients raises their oil content. Another is that the sunlight conversion rate and therefore efficiency of the process is highest in low light levels, e.g., 10% of full sun.

  Perhaps the major consideration is where would inputs come from for very large scale production of this biomass? Some advocates refer to use of nutrient rich waste water from agriculture, but far greater quantities would be needed to make a significant contribution to replacing fossil fuel dependence. Around 40% of the input material must be carbon dioxide and therefore the process could be coupled to coal-fired power stations, but it is not clear how far how much CO2 would have

http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID= 829 It's an interesting read.

I think the people driving VW Golf/TDI's are running Biodiesel.

* can make in USA (no foreign dependence).
* runs in existing diesel engines.
* less toxic than regular diesel, in fact biodegradable.
* creates more demand for US soybean crop.
* no new infrastructure needed, just more diesel engines.
* emissions better in almost also cases than existing diesel emissions.
* can mix in any percentage with existing diesel fuel.

yes i know it would take *a lot* of soy crop to meet the US oil consumption - but check out some of the research on using algae for biodiesel production at a much higher land density.

overall there are a *lot* of pros vs. cons regarding this alternative fuel IMHO.

for more information:
http://www.grassolean.com/
http://www.biodieselnow.com/
http://forums.tdiclub.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board= UBB44

Well, compare the waste from a nuclear reactor to the waste from a petrol-burning factory. If the nuclear waste is kept in secure containers at the reactor, then the environment really isn't effected is it? How about the cancer rates of people living within 10 miles of the reactor? 20 miles? That's an important question. And is the world really stable enough to consider a reactor and it's waste secure sitting on the beach 40 miles from my house? And is nuclear power really that much cheaper than building solar arrays in the desert? If an accident happened, I'd think not.

Biodiesel is the best solution for power I've found. And my unmodified 97 VW Jetta TDI is already running it. Clean, renewable, domestic.

I have a similar situation. I purchased my girlfriend a 2002 Jetta TDI for her 100 mile a day commute. Her average mileage has been between 43-45 mpg. I agree, you have to love the diesel. Now if the emissions would improve. I talked to a gentleman who distributes bio-diesel and running bio at 5%-10% quiets the engine and increases fuel economy even further. He also mentioned that it is the only method right now to meet the 2006 low sulfur diesel criteria.

As for TD oil playing a larger role as oil prices rise, I completely agree. I have done some reading on it and I feel completely down with its "cool" factor. It solves an entire grip of environmental problems and some consumptive problems. But as for providing all of our energy, I have to disagree with you.

Lets look at the US We have a quick look at the animal waste side. Animal waste accounts for 130 times the amount of waste compared to a human. So the human component to the bio-waste system seems negligible. (But let's get these TD toilets installed asap. It sure beats a septic tank!!!!)

• The US animal industry produced 1.4 billion tons(us)[5] of waste.
• Oil makes 45 GJ/ton roughly[6,7].
• 8.9% of mass can get extacted as oil. [8,4]
• The system boasts a 15% inefficiency.[4]
• So we have 1,270,417,422waste*ton_us * .089oil/waste[8,4] * .9(ton/ton_us)* 45GJ/ton * .85 Efficient [4] =
• 3892336657GJ(10^9J) or 3.89EJ (10^18J)

(and does this include the inefficiencies for central processing and removal of solid wastes?)

Take this against a US energy requirement of 100EJ[2] of which about 35EJ(10^18J)[9] of which absolutely has to be in the form of oil. (90% of all transportation is oil, oil is needed for fertilizers, you only get 10th as much energy from the natural gas, etc)

Needs vs Production by TD
35000000000000000000 J == 35EJ
3892336657000000000 J == 3.9EJ

So it could cover perhaps 1/10 of our oil requirements. So we will have to turn to marginal lands, forests, and perhaps even replace arable land that produces human food with gas food. And we have no data to show that this amount of conversion into oil and burning of our ecosystem will not irreparably harm it. Nor do we have any data to show that we can get 10 times as much out of Agriculture solutions than our horribly inefficient livestock industry. (All non agricultural conversions work as non-renewable resources, so I'll leave that out of the discussion.) So we still don't have enough energy and we have to convert the environment into oil to make up any losses. And if we only begin building this infrastructure after oil prices rise to dangerously high levels, we have no assurance that we can build it fast enough to prevent systematic collapse of economies, especially given the inefficiencies outlined above. And we would have to start making food for oil instead of people.

It just doesn't seem reasonable to estimate its ability to produce more than 100 EJ of energy on a global level. So it at maximum has the ability to delay the inevitable for a very short time. Especially given that world energy use will rise to 800EJ by 2020[8]. You may have found security in thinking TD will save the human race, but the numbers don't seem to back you up.

And please note, the efficiencies I quoted were from studies done of real biomater TD [8], not the hypothetical human conversion rate of 21% oil.

References

1. http://www.changingworldtech.com/
2. http://www.cpast.org/Articles/fetch.adp?topicnum=1 3
3. http://www.uce-uu.nl/showproject.php?id=3
4. http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID= 829
5. http://lists.justnet.info/pipermail/asc-media/2003 -August/000391.html
6. http://me.queensu.ca/courses/MECH430/Assets/Files/ Recommended%20Reading/Power%20Table%20.pdf

1) We could power the entire USA on algae-based biodiesel with a combined landmass the size of Deleware for less than $2/gallon.

2) Biodiesel runs in every diesel made since about 1992 without any modifications.

3) It is a domestic, renewable, closed-carbon fuel.

Feel a little better ?

Furthemore, it can be had in many parts of the US for not much more than regular diesel. I live in the Atlanta area and get mine in 55 gallon drums, delivered to my door, for $2.50/gallon, taxes and transport costs included.

I wish the media would quit griping about future alternative fuel sources. A renewable, domestic, practical, affordable solution is here, now.

I'm gettin a little late in the game (already over 500 posts), so this'll probably never see the light of day, but...

Have you considered checking into other alternative fuels such as E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) or biodiesel (comes in different ratios, but B100 is available, which is 100% vegetable oil derived fuel)? Cars that run these fuels are in some senses superior to hybrid, in that you reduce dependance on the oil industry to an even greater degree. In some areas gas stations have biodiesel, roughly the same price as gas, better mileage, and far better for the ecosystem.
More here

There is a low cost option that exists today in the Seattle area--Biodiesel. I recently sold my '96 Honda Accord and with the proceeds bought a '79 Mercedes diesel. I now drive the Mercedes on biodiesel-a fuel made from vegetable oil. Why would I do such a thing?
- This car does not contribute to global warming as the CO2 it emits was fixed from our current atmoshpere, not a Jurassic atmosphere like petro fuels
- It has 50% the CO emissions of a regular diesel engine
- It has 10% the total hydrocarbon emissions
- It has a 100% reduction in sulphides compared to standard diesel fuel
- There are 4 pumps in the Puget sound area
- If I can't get a hold of biodiesel, I can just put regular diesel in the pump, with no problems
- The car gets 27 MPG
- I don't rely on foreign oil to get around town
- I don't support Exxon/Mobil/Texaco
- I support the American economy by using fuels grown in America

Biodiesel is here today, is inexpensive to get into, has no switching costs, has great political and economic ramifications, and I look suhweet rolling in my Benzo.

1) Natural gas, not oil, is used in making commercial fertilizer.

This is an important point from the USA's point of view, since the vast majority of our natural gas comes from domestic sources and Canada.

2) Most natural fuel does NOT use more (fossil) fuel than it produces (in natural fuel).

Corn-based ethanol is the evil fuel you're speaking of. It is indeed a huge energy sink. The only reason it exists is because of huge government subsidies. Biodiesel, on the other hand, is 78% solar-powered. That is, only 22% of the energy in virgin soybean oil-derived biodiesel comes from fossil fuels.

Also consider that animal waste (pig crap) based methanol can be used in place of natural gas, thus completely removing fossil fuels from the biodiesel equation. However, this is not going to happen until one or both of the following happen:

1) consumers demand environmentally-friendly fuel by refusing to use fossil fuels

and/or

2) the demand for oil exceeds the easily-extractable supply of oil, thus raising the economic costs of extracting fossil fuel high enough to where bio-fuels can compete

Of these two alternatives, (2) is the most likely. Already, biodiesel can purchased for a little over $2/gallon in bulk, state fuel taxes included. I give it another 10 years before the increasing world energy demand outstrips its soon-to-peak supply.

As for myself, I drive a 2002 VW New Beetle TDI, which is in stock form (no fuel mods) and is powered by biodiesel. While the biodiesel is more expensive than regular diesel, the fuel economy of my vehicle is high enough (50 mpg) that I still enjoy fuel savings when compared to my gasoline-powered brethren.

Here are some interesting links:

Biodiesel Now

Biodiesel

TDI Club

"MBTE is a great way to meet emissions goals!"(too bad it pollutes the water table faster than you can say 'aquifer', and is a known carcinogen. Next time you fill up, look for that nice little "this gas may contain MTBE" sticker. Do a search on "MTBE health hazards" on google some time. That electric car looking better all of the sudden?)

This synthetic hydrocarbon fuel is different from biodiesel by two major things: no engine adjustments necessary to run on this fuel

No adjustments are required to run Biodiesel in any diesel engine made in the last decade or so. The problem is that Biodiesel can eat through some old types of rubber used in seals and fuel lines. Modern diesel engines do not use these types of rubber. Older engines could be retrofitted just by changing out old rubber lines, maybe needed anyway if the car is old enough! The only other thing is that biodiesel will dissolve engine deposits, since American diesel no. 2 is dirty, there can be a lot of deposits. If you have driven a while on regular diesel, biodiesel can lossen deposits, which can then clog fuel filters. Diesels have to replace the fuel filter pretty regularly - so it shouldn't be much of an issue.
Check out Biodiesel.org or BioDieselNow.com for more info.

Lots of Volkswagen TDI owners use Biodiesel.

To remain on topic - there is a plant near Salt Lake City, Utah that is doing something similar to this. Smithfield Foods Inc. will be making BioMethanol from pork waste.

You can have the farming's equipment Diesels burn BioDiesel. Or try this link. Or this one. There are choices.

While the idea of a Hydrogen-powered vehicle is a great one, if Slashdot readers are interested in a "more" environmentally-friendly vehicle there are options right now.

Biodiesel (more info here and here) is diesel fuel that will work in any new-ish diesel-powered vehicle with out ANY modifications. Benefits?

- Availability of the vehicle. Volkswagen produces a line of turbo diesel injected vehicles right now. They are available from about US$15k - $30k, depending on which model and features you ask for.
- Availability of the fuel. Biodiesel is NOT as wide-spread as diesel - not by far. But it IS available. There's a station in my hometown, Portland, OR and one down in Eugene, OR. According to the map of refueling sites provided by biodiesel.org, there are nine biodiesel stations in California.
- Cost of the fuel. B20, that is 20% biodiesel and 80% regular diesel, costs about US$1.75/gallon in Portland, OR. That's about what premium/super goes for here, give or take 10 cents. I don't have info on what B100 costs - probably around $2.25 or more or possibly less. Depends on your supplier.
- Biodiesel benefits the American (or local) economy. Biodiesel is created from plants. Soy and such. Soy beans can be grown locally in many places of the world. Oil can be had in America, too, but there's not much of it and one it's gone, it is GONE. More soy beans can be grown at any time.
- Biodiesel is "environmentally friendly". According to the US EPA in this PDF document, use of B100 biodiesel will reduce the output of carbon monoxide from a single veh by 50%. B100 will reduce particulate emissions by 70% (less smog). Total hydrocarbon emissions reduced by 40%. Reductions in sulfate emissions by 100%.
- Biodiesel takes less energy to make than diesel and much less energy to make than gasoline.
- Diesel vehicles, particularly the TDI's from VW, are VERY fuel efficient. Expect to get 40/city, 45+/highway (expessed in miles per gallon). Many people report getting 600+ miles to the tank.

Hydrogen-powered vehicles will be great when they are mass-produced in 10 years. Until then, look at Biodiesel. I think the benefits far outweigh the added expense of the fuel.